A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

A. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, even though the Defendant was physically and mentally weak due to depression at the time of committing the instant crime.

B. The sentence of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) against the wrongful defendant in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. The phenomenon where a person commits a crime because he/she did not suppress his/her impulse by misapprehending the legal principles is likely to find out much for the normal person. Thus, barring special circumstances, it cannot be deemed that a person who has a character defect requires an act that is not expected to restrain his/her impulse and to demand compliance with the law, barring special circumstances. Therefore, it is reasonable to deem that the same character defect as the disorder of impulse adjustment does not constitute a mental disorder, which is a reason for reduction or exemption of punishment. However, even if a mental disease within the original meaning that impedes the ability to discern things more than that, or if it is deemed that the cause is equal to that of a person who has mental disorder within the original meaning even though it is very serious, it should be deemed that the crime of larceny was committed due to mental and physical disorder (see Supreme Court Decision 9Do693, 99Do179, Apr. 27, 199).

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment twice for the same crime in Seoul District Court 200 Gohap 339, 2000 Gohap 200 and 200 Gohap 233, and 23 violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Larceny). The defendant was sentenced to imprisonment twice for the same crime in 2005 and 2006.

However, the method of crime of this case, the contents of the crime, and the crime recognized by the above evidence.